The defendant faced trial at Maidstone Crown Court for aggravated burglary, a serious offence carrying a likely starting point of 8 years’ imprisonment. The prosecution’s case alleged that he had broken into the complainant’s home, armed with a knife, and attempted to inflict grievous bodily harm. The case relied heavily on recorded statements made by the defendant at the time of his arrest, which the prosecution intended to present during its opening remarks to the jury.

Tetevi applied to exclude this evidence on the grounds that it had been obtained in serious violation of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) Code of Practice. Specifically, this related to the failure to caution the suspect before questioning him about the offence, improper conduct during interviews, and the denial of the suspect’s right to legal representation. He argued that these breaches were especially serious and prejudicial, given the defendant’s vulnerability.

Following the judge’s expression of serious concern regarding how the evidence had been obtained, the prosecution reviewed the matter and subsequently offered no evidence, resulting in a Not Guilty verdict.

Instructed by Leah Parkes of Reeves & Co.